You can't see the reason?What if you're the evil crazy one, and we aren't all evil and crazy and all deserve to die?You're so innocent and acceptable, but the people you dislike are not.What are you adding to the forum?How many people are tired of your style and thinking?

Ya know, I really don't think that's the fucking case, Dan. All I have done is sat here and tried to teach of love and good things; different philosophies and theories, etc. I've poked holes in other peoples theories and proven that they can not poke holes in mine because their shots are inaccurate because they don't know themselves; and then I got pissed off when they began attacking me in a petty manner instead of expressing themselves properly like true adults instead of spoiled little brat children. And now you're acting just like a spoiled little brat child.

And frankly, it's a bunch of bullshit that such has to be done when talking about peace, love, God, etc. That I have to defend myself to such violent measures just because these spoiled brat child-minded adults can't act appropriately and don't want to and you honestly think nothing is ever going to come of it, is the funny part.

I don't hate any of you. I only ever loved you and still love you and try to love you even as you make me dislike you and the love remains as I dislike you in the moment, for your actions are not the sum of you and it's them that I truly dislike.

Frankly, I don't give a damn what the fuck you do, Dan. I've already told them to ban me several times and they refuse to because it's what I want and then they reinforce that I have not acted unreasonably.

Ierrellus wrote:Making a death threat should be reason enough for being banned.

Agreed.

If not THIS, then where is the limit?

I've been kicked of for far less.

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint."The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest "A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.These just keep getting funnier.

Ya know, I really don't think that's the fucking case, Dan. All I have done is sat here and tried to teach of love

Oh yeah, the love just keeps pouring from you

different philosophies and theories, etc. I've poked holes in other peoples theories and proven that they can not poke holes in mine

You never even tried to considered a different viewpoint from yours. You somehow even manage to get in a fight with the most accepting, moderate theists here.

You react to every opinion that slightly differs from yours with insults and ultimately threats. You're the easiest target ever for trolls because you feed them so much. They don't even need to try to provoke you, just provide a different opinion and you'll already be writing walls of text about your superiority and relationship with God, insult the other person and threaten them.

Considering how easy your pathetic attempts at arguments are to refute you're the perfect victim for trolls. The cherry on top of the cake is that you claim that you are the bane of all trolls and that your arguments are irrefutable, oh the irony

You're like a ball trolls like to kick around when they feel like it. Entertaining for a while but gets boring.

If not THIS, then where is the limit?

I've been kicked of for far less.

I don't even care if he gets banned or not personally, but for the sake of consistency he should be because we aren't even allowed to change our name to what we want to even if it doesn't insult anybody and he can make loads of insults and death threats to others just like that ?

Just to clarify, bans are tied to warnings. If you have a bunch of warnings, and do something piddly that is still deserving of another warning, you could be banned. Conversely, if you otherwise have no warnings, and then do something egregious, you may not be banned.

So, the fact that you've been banned for less says little about the current situation.

Ya know, I really don't think that's the fucking case, Dan. All I have done is sat here and tried to teach of love

Oh yeah, the love just keeps pouring from you

different philosophies and theories, etc. I've poked holes in other peoples theories and proven that they can not poke holes in mine

You never even tried to considered a different viewpoint from yours. You somehow even manage to get in a fight with the most accepting, moderate theists here.

You react to every opinion that slightly differs from yours with insults and ultimately threats. You're the easiest target ever for trolls because you feed them so much. They don't even need to try to provoke you, just provide a different opinion and you'll already be writing walls of text about your superiority and relationship with God, insult the other person and threaten them.

Considering how easy your pathetic attempts at arguments are to refute you're the perfect victim for trolls. The cherry on top of the cake is that you claim that you are the bane of all trolls and that your arguments are irrefutable, oh the irony

You're like a ball trolls like to kick around when they feel like it. Entertaining for a while but gets boring.

If not THIS, then where is the limit?

I've been kicked of for far less.

I don't even care if he gets banned or not personally, but for the sake of consistency he should be because we aren't even allowed to change our name to what we want to even if it doesn't insult anybody and he can make loads of insults and death threats to others just like that ?

\Yeah, I have tried to spread love; I have been attacked for it consistently. When I get attacked, I respond.

I have considered different opinions than my own. I discount theirs as wrong after I read and consider it in full; it doesn't take me very long because most of it is thoughts I've already had; incomplete, incoherent bullshit. I call them on their shit to prove the incompleteness and incoherency and they get pissed the fuck off into attacking me, thus getting exactly what they deserve when I respond. I'm going to insult them to sting them to make them do better and THAT IS love. When people fight against the love that I bring that I know will change this world for the better; you better believe I'm going to give warnings and threats, because it's not just me that feels this way; it's countless people around the fucking world.

Nobody can refute my arguments; a good many have tried and failed because they simply do not know themselves and are not honest enough with themselves to see the truth; and you are one of them. You're just another fucker who doesn't WANT to understand. Fuck off. It's that fucking simple. I have shown you what love is and what it can be and what it drives me to do and you sit there and claim it isn't love because none of you fucking WANT to get it.

I have not once been inconsistent, though you'll sit there and try to tell me that I have been. I forgive you, because you're just another ignorant fucker. You don't know any better.

I hate the idea of weeding the very people who are in the most need of philosophy from the discussion because they don't get "it", or don't fit in. It's a horrible selective precedent that if followed too far, will only leave the most bland and uninventive people around. Both Idiot and Ben have a place here.

I provided, via the lovheim cube, a pretty solid metric, for the first time probably on any forum, to objectively tackle trolling and infighting..... so other options can be pursued. I'll provide more ad hoc, and EVERYONE can figure out for themselves where they stand, and move the discussions in such a way that foreign police departments aren't brought in to weigh in.

Fuck the moderators, but fuck us each ten times more if as philosophers we can't know ourselves and the people we are talking with psychologically. We wouldn't need them if we could just take care of this ourselves as a group.

Support "The Angels of East Africa" on smile.Amazon.com it is free to do, they donate 0.05% of your purchase cost to them, or give donations directly via:

Just to clarify, bans are tied to warnings. If you have a bunch of warnings, and do something piddly that is still deserving of another warning, you could be banned. Conversely, if you otherwise have no warnings, and then do something egregious, you may not be banned.

So, the fact that you've been banned for less says little about the current situation.

That would be the case only if the moderation were evenly done.It is not.Idiotidioms gets away with blue murder. He is regularly abusive and rude.Threatening to kill someone should be taken seriously.

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint."The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest "A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.These just keep getting funnier.

Oh dear lord, I have had people so pissed off at me they tell me they are going to kill me. About one every few years. At fifty I ought to be dead. Saying I am going to kill you is about the equivalent of saying fuck off I don't want you in my life now,, at least in the USA. Smart people walk away, dumbasses stay and push more buttons. I blame the dumbassses.

I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.

Kriswest wrote:Oh dear lord, I have had people so pissed off at me they tell me they are going to kill me. About one every few years. At fifty I ought to be dead. Saying I am going to kill you is about the equivalent of saying fuck off I don't want you in my life now,

I have had it said to me. I haven't ever had it typed at me. Me US cit also and sure i'll kill you and the like is common, especially amongst children. I think a family member or two has said it. Though pretty much every time it was someone I knew, someone whose emotional expression I knew and could place the expression in the context of our connection. I don't remember many strangers saying it to me. I think this is because when a stranger says it it is harder to know if it is a real threat or not, so generally people avoid that expression with strangers. I am sure it happens, but I think generally then violence is near the table if not necessarily on the table.

But typing it?

What would it take to get you you type that threat?

Stuff gets blurted out, speaking, that is.

But to sit down and type coherent, often long sentences in idiotcoms case, where threats are made and put in the context clearly. That's not blurting.

I don't mean that this means he really would do violence. I DO mean that it is not what happens when you cousin says she is going to kill you for telling Tommy.......[and so on]

No, we've lowered ourselves. He has a radical, yet predictable imbalance between inductive and deductive reasoning, hinged on aggression and protectiveness in the fight or flight response.

It's a common trait in many thinkers..... we all possess this thought pattern actually, much of the discussion on this site sits on one extreme or another....the preference is deeply hard wired. In our dialogue, we have to be aware he in inherently hostile to source ideas and personifications that lead to pain and alertness on his end. He is much better than most here on this site at linking concepts together from schematic presentations.

When you talk to him, try using syllogisms that transfer verbal thought in a linear pattern, into visual aspects (description of parts).

He will read this and become self conscious, but will also grasp the truth of this. It will take time for him to learn to balance deductive and inductive thoughts into synergistic patterns he can accept. One glance at half the agnostic and atheistic rebuttals on this site against strawmen suggest too many infact carry an unhealthy imbalance themselves.....

We just gotta learn to get out of our shells. Imagine if you were a lawyer, and you had to deal with a hostile witness. Hostile why? You have a job to do..... people are watching. You have to analyse the person then and there, and approach them responsibly, with a understanding of what makes them tick to get the data you need out of them.

In Philosophy, especially in debate, we have to deal with a wide range of hostile contenders, who don't always play by our rules. They might not care for your presentation, or see what is wrong with your assertion they are operating off a logical fallacy. You gotta play by their rules..... if your going to get the idea across. It takes rhetorical finesse and dialectic honesty to approach.

A good philosopher can do this. Approach many kinds of thinkers, tackle the underlining issues they have against our point of view.

We no longer PRODUCE good philosophers. Reason why..... for starters, we turn off, and turn away from thinkers such as Idiot. Let's look at similar thinkers, who took the style of thinking to the ultimate extreme..... Timothy McVeigh, The Unibomber, bin Laden...... our society just writes them off..... no fucking clue or even an attempt to grasp them, communicate with them, figure them out. They all present predictable traits. They all have a remarkable specialization in thought. They all are rebelling against painful threats, and are protecting something.

Because we fail like idiots to actively engage such people in philosophy, they continue, unchecked..... till some amazing masterplan is hatched.... then everyone is fucked. Our civilization is stuck in this silly cycle.

Quite frankly, I would prefer a few more guys like Idiot and Ben on this forum, and strap those eyelid openers from "A Clockwork Orange" to the people who maliciously and fanatically assault such thinkers..... in the abhorrent name of recoiling from emotions and just about any extreme, demarking etiquette and equanimity as the valued virtues, banishing such bad people like Idiot away. Its a sickening demand that everyone else much arbitrarily support one thinking style by ostrichizing the other. Fuck that Dan..... how about we raise this sites standards by booting your ass out?

In philosophy, when you present ideas, be prepared to receive from all kinds of cognitive styles. Learn to deal with it..... we all have an intellectual Achilles Heel, a point from which we act and express our thoughts increasingly irrationally.

Idiot sits on a stable, and yes, SANE personality type. You ban him, you basically wrote off half of Seattle, South Korea, and some of our best politicians and programmers. You lose most school teachers, our best abstract theorists, and finest theologians.

I'm not interested in arguments to banish anyone. You wanna learn to do philosophy, learn how to deal with different kinds of thinkers. We are showing a unhealthy cultural deficit on this site to back one kind of thinker over another, and our society has shown this to be a weakness too..... we fail to communicate and competently respond..... countless acts of violence and terror results.

Idiot has already begun grappling this himself, he is self conscious of his weaknesses. How many of you are aware of your own flaws of ignorance? A good philosopher raises the bar, without excuses. A good philosopher takes philosophy seriously, and doesn't try to weed out every different kind of thinker, so we can have a pathetic club of similar minded thinkers. Get in the mix.

Support "The Angels of East Africa" on smile.Amazon.com it is free to do, they donate 0.05% of your purchase cost to them, or give donations directly via:

Thank you for understanding me, Contra. I am not perfect and so in some ways I am still imbalanced. I will never doubt my self again, though; and it has taken all of my experiences here, even, to bring me to this point I am at. I am not saying I won't ever lose my temper again or that it's wrong. I'm not saying I won't swear or cut people down if I have to. I believe these are reasonable responses to a vastly unreasonable problem.

I am sorry for the way things have been, but could any of you honestly say that the full of the message would have or could have been gotten across without the chain of events since my entrance to this place; at this point in time with the world the way it is? I believe it was necessary for each of us as exactly what it was. Let us move on, though.

It is not that I wanted to be away from here; it's because I wanted to be away from those types of people because of what they made me feel. In some ways, Mr. Reasonable was right when he said I was panicking a bit (if he was the one who said it.) As I have said, I am now firmly on the path I want to be on and know it full well and have made it over the biggest hurdle in the way. There are still hurdles, but they are small in comparison and the rest of the journey is downhill.

I have realized that my journey is what it is and what it had to be with the world the way it is. If the world were different, nobody would suffer as much as we have in our lives; they wouldn't ever need to. Love was always just as important as knowledge and wisdom and understanding. Logic and compassion go hand in hand.

As you have said, it is not what you believe, it is how you believe it. I have never had a problem with someone having an alternative belief as long as they can fully theorize it without resorting to petty bullshit, which people of a lot of varying groups have done; including this one; and I'm not point fingers individually but at the entire human race. It pained me to hear their responses to simply being told they were wrong; 'no, this isn't the answer and this is why.'

Certainly our best bet of going into the future is growth and helping each other grow according to our individual strengths and weaknesses and how to make those compliment the whole of society. There is no need for all of this futile fighting and struggling once humanity as a whole overcomes its insecurities. This is all I have ever said, or tried to say.

I have pushed people to become better than what they were; some hated me for it; some were indifferent; a few even thanked me for it, in their own manner. The fact is still that neither one of us would be what we are without every other person in the world. Each of us is important; the butterfly effect and hidden connections are important; love is important.

We have all lowered our selves, which is why it becomes our responsibility; all of us; to help undo that and raise our selves back up. This is what I have been doing and what I have been urging others to do as much as possible. My impatience and anger in that regard must be until they no longer need to be and as I have said: it becomes only a matter of time at this point.

Contra-Nietzsche wrote:No, we've lowered ourselves. He has a radical, yet predictable imbalance between inductive and deductive reasoning, hinged on aggression and protectiveness in the fight or flight response.

It's a common trait in many thinkers..... we all possess this thought pattern actually, much of the discussion on this site sits on one extreme or another....the preference is deeply hard wired. In our dialogue, we have to be aware he in inherently hostile to source ideas and personifications that lead to pain and alertness on his end. He is much better than most here on this site at linking concepts together from schematic presentations.

When you talk to him, try using syllogisms that transfer verbal thought in a linear pattern, into visual aspects (description of parts).

He will read this and become self conscious, but will also grasp the truth of this. It will take time for him to learn to balance deductive and inductive thoughts into synergistic patterns he can accept. One glance at half the agnostic and atheistic rebuttals on this site against strawmen suggest too many infact carry an unhealthy imbalance themselves.....

We just gotta learn to get out of our shells. Imagine if you were a lawyer, and you had to deal with a hostile witness. Hostile why? You have a job to do..... people are watching. You have to analyse the person then and there, and approach them responsibly, with a understanding of what makes them tick to get the data you need out of them.

In Philosophy, especially in debate, we have to deal with a wide range of hostile contenders, who don't always play by our rules. They might not care for your presentation, or see what is wrong with your assertion they are operating off a logical fallacy. You gotta play by their rules..... if your going to get the idea across. It takes rhetorical finesse and dialectic honesty to approach.

A good philosopher can do this. Approach many kinds of thinkers, tackle the underlining issues they have against our point of view.

We no longer PRODUCE good philosophers. Reason why..... for starters, we turn off, and turn away from thinkers such as Idiot. Let's look at similar thinkers, who took the style of thinking to the ultimate extreme..... Timothy McVeigh, The Unibomber, bin Laden...... our society just writes them off..... no fucking clue or even an attempt to grasp them, communicate with them, figure them out. They all present predictable traits. They all have a remarkable specialization in thought. They all are rebelling against painful threats, and are protecting something.

Because we fail like idiots to actively engage such people in philosophy, they continue, unchecked..... till some amazing masterplan is hatched.... then everyone is fucked. Our civilization is stuck in this silly cycle.

Quite frankly, I would prefer a few more guys like Idiot and Ben on this forum, and strap those eyelid openers from "A Clockwork Orange" to the people who maliciously and fanatically assault such thinkers..... in the abhorrent name of recoiling from emotions and just about any extreme, demarking etiquette and equanimity as the valued virtues, banishing such bad people like Idiot away. Its a sickening demand that everyone else much arbitrarily support one thinking style by ostrichizing the other. Fuck that Dan..... how about we raise this sites standards by booting your ass out?

In philosophy, when you present ideas, be prepared to receive from all kinds of cognitive styles. Learn to deal with it..... we all have an intellectual Achilles Heel, a point from which we act and express our thoughts increasingly irrationally.

Idiot sits on a stable, and yes, SANE personality type. You ban him, you basically wrote off half of Seattle, South Korea, and some of our best politicians and programmers. You lose most school teachers, our best abstract theorists, and finest theologians.

I'm not interested in arguments to banish anyone. You wanna learn to do philosophy, learn how to deal with different kinds of thinkers. We are showing a unhealthy cultural deficit on this site to back one kind of thinker over another, and our society has shown this to be a weakness too..... we fail to communicate and competently respond..... countless acts of violence and terror results.

Idiot has already begun grappling this himself, he is self conscious of his weaknesses. How many of you are aware of your own flaws of ignorance? A good philosopher raises the bar, without excuses. A good philosopher takes philosophy seriously, and doesn't try to weed out every different kind of thinker, so we can have a pathetic club of similar minded thinkers. Get in the mix.

Contra-Nietzsche wrote:No, we've lowered ourselves. He has a radical, yet predictable imbalance between inductive and deductive reasoning, hinged on aggression and protectiveness in the fight or flight response.

It's a common trait in many thinkers..... we all possess this thought pattern actually, much of the discussion on this site sits on one extreme or another....the preference is deeply hard wired. In our dialogue, we have to be aware he in inherently hostile to source ideas and personifications that lead to pain and alertness on his end. He is much better than most here on this site at linking concepts together from schematic presentations.

When you talk to him, try using syllogisms that transfer verbal thought in a linear pattern, into visual aspects (description of parts).

He will read this and become self conscious, but will also grasp the truth of this. It will take time for him to learn to balance deductive and inductive thoughts into synergistic patterns he can accept. One glance at half the agnostic and atheistic rebuttals on this site against strawmen suggest too many infact carry an unhealthy imbalance themselves.....

We just gotta learn to get out of our shells. Imagine if you were a lawyer, and you had to deal with a hostile witness. Hostile why? You have a job to do..... people are watching. You have to analyse the person then and there, and approach them responsibly, with a understanding of what makes them tick to get the data you need out of them.

In Philosophy, especially in debate, we have to deal with a wide range of hostile contenders, who don't always play by our rules. They might not care for your presentation, or see what is wrong with your assertion they are operating off a logical fallacy. You gotta play by their rules..... if your going to get the idea across. It takes rhetorical finesse and dialectic honesty to approach.

A good philosopher can do this. Approach many kinds of thinkers, tackle the underlining issues they have against our point of view.

We no longer PRODUCE good philosophers. Reason why..... for starters, we turn off, and turn away from thinkers such as Idiot. Let's look at similar thinkers, who took the style of thinking to the ultimate extreme..... Timothy McVeigh, The Unibomber, bin Laden...... our society just writes them off..... no fucking clue or even an attempt to grasp them, communicate with them, figure them out. They all present predictable traits. They all have a remarkable specialization in thought. They all are rebelling against painful threats, and are protecting something.

Because we fail like idiots to actively engage such people in philosophy, they continue, unchecked..... till some amazing masterplan is hatched.... then everyone is fucked. Our civilization is stuck in this silly cycle.

Quite frankly, I would prefer a few more guys like Idiot and Ben on this forum, and strap those eyelid openers from "A Clockwork Orange" to the people who maliciously and fanatically assault such thinkers..... in the abhorrent name of recoiling from emotions and just about any extreme, demarking etiquette and equanimity as the valued virtues, banishing such bad people like Idiot away. Its a sickening demand that everyone else much arbitrarily support one thinking style by ostrichizing the other. Fuck that Dan..... how about we raise this sites standards by booting your ass out?

In philosophy, when you present ideas, be prepared to receive from all kinds of cognitive styles. Learn to deal with it..... we all have an intellectual Achilles Heel, a point from which we act and express our thoughts increasingly irrationally.

Idiot sits on a stable, and yes, SANE personality type. You ban him, you basically wrote off half of Seattle, South Korea, and some of our best politicians and programmers. You lose most school teachers, our best abstract theorists, and finest theologians.

I'm not interested in arguments to banish anyone. You wanna learn to do philosophy, learn how to deal with different kinds of thinkers. We are showing a unhealthy cultural deficit on this site to back one kind of thinker over another, and our society has shown this to be a weakness too..... we fail to communicate and competently respond..... countless acts of violence and terror results.

Idiot has already begun grappling this himself, he is self conscious of his weaknesses. How many of you are aware of your own flaws of ignorance? A good philosopher raises the bar, without excuses. A good philosopher takes philosophy seriously, and doesn't try to weed out every different kind of thinker, so we can have a pathetic club of similar minded thinkers. Get in the mix.

Great post. I don't agree with all of it, but it was nevertheless great.

There comes a time when you just have to toe a hard line and show tough love instead; and if you can't understand that, you will. You teach them how to fit into nature, you break that wild spirit of theirs and then build them up fresh and in a way that is conducive to the whole; you teach them how to reignite that fire inside of themselves and use it productively; no matter how hard it gets; and as you have seen there are some unruly children.

Who will serve justice where the laws of men fail to? One born from and raised by the Earth and given a portion of the spirit of the immortal. A mixture of mortal and God; no different than anyone else. Just different choices influenced by different parts of society. Each one of you would have done exactly the same if you had worn my shoes in life and vice versa; so don't see it as me judging you. You do that to your self based on your perceptions of what is said.

but don't push it, because we'll make your perception a reality and then live our reality.

I know what you did to me. You can cover it up all you want, but that's bullshit.

(Reality isn't so kind. Everything doesn't work out the way you want it to. That's why...) As long as you don’t get your hopes up, you can take anything... You feel less pain.

(Right and wrong are not what separate us and our enemies. It's our different standpoints, our perspectives that separate us. Both sides blame one another. There's no good or bad side. Just two sides holding different views.)

What do you think? To tell you the truth... I worry too much about what others think of me. I hate that side of me... That's why I didn't want anyone to get to know me. I wanted to hide that side of myself. I hate it.

(Reality isn't so kind. Everything doesn't work out the way you want it to. That's why...) As long as you don’t get your hopes up, you can take anything... You feel less pain.

(Right and wrong are not what separate us and our enemies. It's our different standpoints, our perspectives that separate us. Both sides blame one another. There's no good or bad side. Just two sides holding different views.)

What do you think? To tell you the truth... I worry too much about what others think of me. I hate that side of me... That's why I didn't want anyone to get to know me. I wanted to hide that side of myself. I hate it.

(Reality isn't so kind. Everything doesn't work out the way you want it to. That's why...) As long as you don’t get your hopes up, you can take anything... You feel less pain.

(Right and wrong are not what separate us and our enemies. It's our different standpoints, our perspectives that separate us. Both sides blame one another. There's no good or bad side. Just two sides holding different views.)

What do you think? To tell you the truth... I worry too much about what others think of me. I hate that side of me... That's why I didn't want anyone to get to know me. I wanted to hide that side of myself. I hate it.

LaughingMan wrote:This sounds like a case that only Sherlock Holmes is capable of solving.

My summer right after sixth grade, I read each and every story of Doyle's Sherlock Holmes. The orphanage had this great little library and I found this thick onion-skinned book of Sherlock Holmes. I would go up to our playground and sit in the cornfield and read, read, read - happiness personified, at least while I was reading.

There's no case to solve here. Sherlock would simply tell us that the case is over. The he would go pick up his violin and start playing - "Let It Be". It was Doyle who actually composed the song. McCartney and Lennon found an old written manuscript of it and made it their own.

Sometimes it is the strongest will and spirit which lets it be!

Only kidding about the manuscript thingy.

"Look closely. The beautiful may be small."

"Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe, the oftener and more steadily we reflect on them: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me."

“Whereas the beautiful is limited, the sublime is limitless, so that the mind in the presence of the sublime, attempting to imagine what it cannot, has pain in the failure but pleasure in contemplating the immensity of the attempt.”